appreciation

Hello there,

I'm quite pleased with the way Scene 28 is shaping up. It's starting to cut together like a real conversation with a good pace.

We shot this scene (as I think I said?) from many angles. That is, we shot the first part of the scene (talk of specific relationships) from a few angles and then the second part of the scene (philosophical 'why attraction is healthy') from another set of angles. It really is a neat feeling to be able to put these takes together as if they were one flowing thing. The lines are, uhh, well, basically the same from take to take, but in one take, the lines are more on top of each other, and in another take, things take on a more carefree tone, etc. Cutting the different takes together lets an editor change the actors' rhythms, give them a switch in mood from one line to the next -- if it works/is believable.

It's a good reminder of how much power an editor has over the film as a whole. Javier Bardem (when he won one of those No Country for Old Men acting awards) thanked the editors for managing to piece together his best performance from all the different takes -- that's a kind of gracious we don't see too often.

My beloved John Sayles (writer/director) has said he always edits his own movies because to him it's like the final draft of the piece -- the script is the first draft, shooting is the revision, editing is the final draft. As a prose writer, he, this perspective makes a lot of sense and the more I edit (whenever I'm in an editing phase) the more I agree with him (I certainly experienced how shooting "revised" the script). To hire an outside editor is to grant someone a huge trust. Do they pick the take where the actor stutters a little and seems uncertain about what they're saying, or do they pick the take where the actor is brash, off the cuff. Such a difference in the way an audience will read the meaning of a moment. Not to mention where the close-ups come and where they decidedly do not: which moments are intimate ones.

It's hard to imagine discussion of "auteur theory" having any validity at all when a director's favorite editor or editing preferences are not discussed. Did Hitchcock often use the same editor? Ford? Scorcese? I seem to recall that Welles did -- though I might be thinking of the cinematographer... Tollefson? Something like that.

Anyway, I had some fun today. Yesterday was unfulfilling, but today was satisfying.

REA

Houston, we have a...

Okay, so I went to look up Tape 9 and what was on tape 9 at 46 min and 40 secs was not a CU of Bill, as it was so designated in my log notes. I fast-forwarded. 47:25? No. 49:08? No.

Uh-oh.

51?

Nyet.

So I went back to the PEDL copy that is sorted by tape rather than by scene to see if what I was seeing on the tape was in fact logged as Tape 9 at some point -- and yes, indeed: it says, "Tape 9, Scene 13, no take # [because we were practicing a zoom over and over without slating in between], 46:50 - M turns to cam already in CU."

Hmm.

This is the footage of Larry walking in on Marissa while she's dressing, and then Marissa walking in on Larry while he's washing his shirt in the sink. Pretty good stuff, actually! :)

But not Bill in the kitchen cursing about what a loser Marissa's ex is.

So I turned a couple pages and there at the end of Tape 9's log is another page -- the page I'd been looking at in the copy sorted by scene -- with Tape 9, 46:40 again!

???!!!

This is a problem.

Where the bigeezis are my close-ups of Bill??

I turned the page again and this Tape 9 notation continues -- The Bill CUs had stopped at 51:10 and this one picks up at 51:20, with "Rachel's bare feet walking on RR trax with dried leaves around" and th wild turkey we saw in street!!!!!!

I repeat for emphasis: !!!!!!

LAME!

Hm. When I logged originally, I did it from the SLP VHS tapes that the DP made as copies so I could play them on my TV (had no camera to play DV tapes at that time). Maybe one is mislabled?? Orrr....

Anyway, I checked Tape 19, just in case. I'll check 8 later - and 10? But I can't be looking through all 29 tapes (uhh... 28 tapes). What the hey?? Although maybe I'll have to...

There are a couple CUs of Bill on the end of Tape 3, but the ones I circled as good were on this mystery tape. Hmm.

Ridiculous.

REA

The art has its reasons...

First off --
Happy Birthday, Jenny!

Secondly --
I think I should start a running list for next time: What Not to Do!

I suppose it could have positive things on it as well -- surely I must be seeing more than what I did "wrong" as a director... right? Let me think... Is there anything I think I actually did right on this film? Hmmm...

In any case, What Not to Do Next Time #394:
Do not block a scene with two people working at the same counter or stove without the ability to shoot from the other side of the counter or stove! I mean, unless there is some artful reason to use their backs.

In S & B, I did not have an artful reason to use their BACKS, for heaven's sake. I mean, I had would-be artful reasons for doing a lot of things that others will think were accidental, I suspect, but having BACKS TO CAMERA was not one of them.

Also -- #4,632 -- Do not shoot actors in profile without having them "cheat" towards the camera a little.

I guess I could phrase that one in a positive way: when shooting in profile, have the actors cheat toward camera a little (unless an artful reason to do otherwise).

This reminds me of that Pascal phrase I love so much: "The heart has its reasons of which reason knows nothing." In this case, though, it's art, not heart, of which reason knows nothing. Ha ha?

ahem.

Anyway -- I have been better about editing than about blogging, but it's also true that I'm finding it harder to stay out of my new garden than I expected (pictures on my Facebook page). AND I've developed that Minnesota/Northern Territories disorder, PWSD (Post-Winter Stress Disorder), which manifests itself with the primary symptom of the occasional plaintive, desperate cry in a doorway, vis., "Please don't make me go inside!!" I'm terrified that I'll wake up tomorrow and it will be cold and dark again, that June will turn not into July but into November. I must be outside - I must be where I can see the "leafing greenly" (paraphrase of e.e. cummings) and feel the warm air caressing my sunscreened skin! I wish I could edit on the deck, OMG do I, but the laptop screen gets to washed out.

So, here I am in my study. At least it's overcast today.

I have managed to upload the Gay Comedian stuff from Tape 22 after all (though I have great concern about future tapes having similar degradations), and have cut Scene 27. I'm now about a quarter of the way done with the Attraction/Evolution scene (28). We shot this scene using the ends of four different tapes, which is a little inconvenient.

What Not to Do #4: Do not divide one of the longer scenes over several tapes when you have SEVEN set-ups to cover the way the actors move around the room throughout the scene.

For example, I'm only a little ways into the scene, but I need Bill's close-up now, which we shot in the middle of the footage on the day's third tape (Tape 9). I have already uploaded some footage from Tapes 2 & 3, have not yet looked at Tape 17, where most of the dramatic stuff is.

I suppose an editing teacher would tell me I should look through all of Scene 28's footage, all four tapes, all the way through, before uploading anything. Hmm. It has been a couple years since I did such a thing (when I logged the footage originally). ...see what coverage I really got, not rely on my "ridiculous ice cream" notes.

Oh, all right!

So that's what I'll do now -- watch the rest of Tapes 9 & 17.

See you later!
Rachel

All Rightee Then...

Hi, every(any)one!

Clearly -- as any of my students already had figured out, I suspect -- my ability to judge how long it takes me to do things is substantially limited. I thought things were going quickly with the unpacking, but then reality set in... and then literally as I was setting up my editing station, my partner Pete fell off the roof! Aack!! It was A) scary (I found him lying on the ground, moaning, basically unable to move), B) not even half as bad as it could have been (only one night in the hospital and no neck or back injuries), and C) time- & energy-consuming to do everything around the house that he was unable to do for a while. He's hobbling around with a Frankenstein boot now, back to work and off the Vicadin; seems as normal as he ever did...

And then, this past weekend, I did set all aside, editing included, in order to participate in the 48-Hour Film Project. Woo-hoo!

90 groups participated in Minneapolis this year -- reps gather on Friday evening and receive their genre, line of dialogue, prop and one character. Then we have 48 hours to write, produce and edit a short film (4-7 minutes) including all these elements. It's stressful and fun! I directed this year, which added to the stress, for sure, but it definitely worked out. We had a great group of people! The poor writers stayed up until 3 am working on the script Friday night, then Sat'y morning we secured some locations (really lucked out, there), and I made the shot-list (!!!), and then we shot 'til 8pm. Sunday we edited, turning in our finished product to the judges 15 minutes before the deadline! There will be a screening of a dozen or so of the films (including ours) at the Riverview Theater in South Minneapolis on Tuesday.

Ours is called "Finishing Touch" and you can view it on the editor's website, here: web.mac.com/paulyfunk (he lists our assigned genre as "Comedy" but it was actually "Sci-Fi" -- blame that on the lack of sleep!). On this same website, if you're interested, you'll see another video called "Return of the Century," which is the one I Assist. Directed last year -- that one was harder to edit and really should have been a full 12 minutes or so in order to make complete sense -- but, hey, you can see me in it as a guest at the party! :)

It was interesting this year to direct a script I didn't write most of -- always a good experience. No film written and shot and edited all in TWO DAYS can be perfect, and of course there are some flaws with 'Finishing Touch,' but overall we're quite proud of all we managed to pull together and it's got me all revved up to get back in to See & Be!!

"Attraction = Moths to a Flame" scene, here I come!

Love and Peas,
REA